Pain, depression, anxiety, and psychosis are common non-cognitive symptoms of dementia. They are often underdiagnosed and can cause significant distress and carer strain. Numerous standardised assessment tools (SATs) exist and are recommended for the assessment of non-cognitive symptoms of dementia. Anecdotal evidence suggests that SATs are used rarely and inconsistently. This study aims to explore which SATs to detect non-cognitive symptoms of dementia are recommended in local guidelines and used in practice across different organisations. Secondary aims were to identify barriers and facilitators to using these tools.

This service evaluation is cross-sectional in design. A questionnaire was developed and distributed to clinicians working with patients with advanced dementia in any setting, across four geographical locations (Leeds, Bradford, Hull, and Cambridge). Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and qualitative data from free-text comments were interpreted using thematic analysis.

135 professionals from a range of backgrounds and clinical settings completed the survey. Respondents indicated that SATs for non-cognitive symptoms in dementia were rarely used or recommended. Respondents were unaware of the existence of most SATs listed. 80% respondents felt that SATs were a useful adjunct to a structured clinical assessment. The most recommended tool was the Abbey Pain Scale, with 41 respondents indicating its recommendation by their Trust. Perceived facilitators to using SATs include education and training, reliable IT systems and accessibility. Barriers include lack of time and training.

Numerous SATs are available for use in dementia, but they are rarely recommended in local policy or used in practice. There appears to be a lack of consensus on which, if any, are superior diagnostic tools, and on how or when they should be applied.

There is increasing cross-disciplinary research on the relationship between individuals’ social, cultural and community engagement (SCCE) and mental health. SCCE includes engagement in the arts, culture and heritage, libraries and literature, sports and nature activities, volunteering, and community groups. Research has demonstrated the effects of these activities both on the prevention and management of mental illness. However, it remains unclear whether current research is focusing on the research questions that are of most immediate urgency and relevance to policy and practice.

The current project was funded as part of the UK Research and Innovation cross-disciplinary mental health network programme to develop and co-produce a new cross-disciplinary research agenda on SCCE and mental health.

Established processes and principles for developing health research agendas were followed, with a six-phase design including engagement with over 1000 key stakeholders, consultations, integration of findings and collective prioritisation of key questions.

We identified four core themes: the mode of engagement, process of engagement, impact of engagement and infrastructure required to facilitate engagement. There were many points of agreement across all stakeholder groups on the priority questions within these themes, but also some specific questions of relevance to different sectors.

This agenda is particularly timely given the extreme pressure on mental health services predicted to follow the current COVID-19 pandemic. It is important to identify how resources from other sectors can be mobilised, and what research questions are going to be most important to fund to support SCCE for mental health.